-
Molecular Cancer May 2024We explored potential predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated with durvalumab... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
We explored potential predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated with durvalumab (D) + tremelimumab (T) + etoposide-platinum (EP), D + EP, or EP in the randomized phase 3 CASPIAN trial.
METHODS
805 treatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to receive D + T + EP, D + EP, or EP. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Patients were required to provide an archived tumor tissue block (or ≥ 15 newly cut unstained slides) at screening, if these samples existed. After assessment for programmed cell death ligand-1 expression and tissue tumor mutational burden, residual tissue was used for additional molecular profiling including by RNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry.
RESULTS
In 182 patients with transcriptional molecular subtyping, OS with D ± T + EP was numerically highest in the SCLC-inflamed subtype (n = 10, median 24.0 months). Patients derived benefit from immunotherapy across subtypes; thus, additional biomarkers were investigated. OS benefit with D ± T + EP versus EP was greater with high versus low CD8A expression/CD8 cell density by immunohistochemistry, but with no additional benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP. OS benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP was associated with high expression of CD4 (median 25.9 vs. 11.4 months) and antigen-presenting and processing machinery (25.9 vs. 14.6 months) and MHC I and II (23.6 vs. 17.3 months) gene signatures, and with higher MHC I expression by immunohistochemistry.
CONCLUSIONS
These findings demonstrate the tumor microenvironment is important in mediating better outcomes with D ± T + EP in ES-SCLC, with canonical immune markers associated with hypothesized immunotherapy mechanisms of action defining patient subsets that respond to D ± T.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872.
Topics: Humans; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Biomarkers, Tumor; Lung Neoplasms; Female; Male; Immunotherapy; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Middle Aged; Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Treatment Outcome; Neoplasm Staging; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Prognosis; Adult
PubMed: 38811992
DOI: 10.1186/s12943-024-02014-x -
Oncology Letters Jul 2024Tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Dur/Tre) is the first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) worldwide. The present report describes the case of a...
Tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Dur/Tre) is the first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) worldwide. The present report describes the case of a 68-year-old man diagnosed with advanced HCC and a bile duct tumor thrombus (BDTT) who achieved a complete response to Dur/Tre therapy. The BDTT progressed to the bifurcation of the left and right hepatic ducts. Over time, both the tumors and BDTT progressively decreased in size, and a complete response was confirmed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1.) 6 months after treatment administration. Subsequently, immune-related adverse events, including type 1 diabetes mellitus and diabetic ketoacidosis, emerged, leading to treatment discontinuation. The patient was undergoing outpatient follow-up in a drug-free state with no signs of recurrence 290 days after the initial administration of Dur/Tre. Although long-term and meticulous observations are required, the present findings could influence the choice of systemic chemotherapy for advanced HCC.
PubMed: 38807678
DOI: 10.3892/ol.2024.14465 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... May 2024In the phase III HIMALAYA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03298451) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), the Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval...
PURPOSE
In the phase III HIMALAYA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03298451) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), the Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE) regimen significantly improved overall survival versus sorafenib, and durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), a secondary outcome from HIMALAYA, are reported here.
METHODS
Participants were randomly assigned to receive STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. PROs were assessed (preplanned secondary outcome) using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item Quality of Life Questionnaire and the 18-item HCC module. Time to deterioration (TTD), change from baseline and improvement rate in global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL), functioning, and disease-related symptoms were analyzed.
RESULTS
In total, 1,171 participants were randomly assigned to STRIDE (n = 393), durvalumab (n = 389), or sorafenib (n = 389) and were evaluable for PRO assessments. Across treatment arms, compliance rates for PROs were >77% at baseline and >70% overall. Baseline scores were comparable across treatment arms. TTD in GHS/QoL, physical functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, and abdominal pain was numerically longer for both STRIDE and durvalumab versus sorafenib. Clinically meaningful deterioration in PROs was not observed in any treatment arm. However, TTD in nausea and abdominal swelling was numerically longer for STRIDE versus sorafenib, and the likelihood of clinically meaningful improvement in GHS/QoL, role, emotional and social functioning, and disease-related symptoms was greater with STRIDE and durvalumab versus sorafenib. PROs with STRIDE and durvalumab were generally similar.
CONCLUSION
Compared with sorafenib, STRIDE and durvalumab were associated with clinically meaningful, patient-centered GHS/QoL, functioning, and symptom benefits in people with uHCC. These findings support the benefits of the STRIDE regimen compared with sorafenib for a diverse population reflective of the global uHCC population.
PubMed: 38805668
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.23.01462 -
Cancers May 2024We conducted a comprehensive review of the current literature of published data and clinical trials (MEDLINE), as well as published congress contributions and active... (Review)
Review
We conducted a comprehensive review of the current literature of published data and clinical trials (MEDLINE), as well as published congress contributions and active recruiting clinical trials on targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma. Combinations of different agents and medical therapy along with radiological interventions were analyzed for the setting of advanced HCC. Those settings were also analyzed in combination with adjuvant situations after resection or radiological treatments. We summarized the current knowledge for each therapeutic setting and combination that currently is or has been under clinical evaluation. We further discuss the results in the background of current treatment guidelines. In addition, we review the pathophysiological mechanisms and pathways for each of these investigated targets and drugs to further elucidate the molecular background and underlying mechanisms of action. Established and recommended targeted treatment options that already exist for patients are considered for systemic treatment: atezolizumab/bevacizumab, durvalumab/tremelimumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab. Combination treatment for systemic treatment and local ablative treatment or transarterial chemoembolization and adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment strategies are under clinical investigation.
PubMed: 38791911
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16101831 -
F1000Research 2024Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is traditionally associated with limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Sorafenib, a multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor,... (Review)
Review
Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is traditionally associated with limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Sorafenib, a multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was introduced in 2007 as a first-in-class systemic agent for advanced HCC. After sorafenib, a range of targeted therapies and immunotherapies have demonstrated survival benefits in the past 5 years, revolutionizing the treatment landscape of advanced HCC. More recently, evidence of novel combinations of systemic agents with distinct mechanisms has emerged. In particular, combination trials on atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab have shown encouraging efficacy. Hence, international societies have revamped their guidelines to incorporate new recommendations for these novel systemic agents. Aside from treatment in advanced HCC, the indications for systemic therapy are expanding. For example, the combination of systemic therapeutics with locoregional therapy (trans-arterial chemoembolization or stereotactic body radiation therapy) has demonstrated promising early results in downstaging HCC. Recent trials have also explored the role of systemic therapy as neoadjuvant treatment for borderline-resectable HCC or as adjuvant treatment to reduce recurrence risk after curative resection. Despite encouraging results from clinical trials, the real-world efficacy of systemic agents in specific patient subgroups (such as patients with advanced cirrhosis, high bleeding risk, renal impairment, or cardiometabolic diseases) remains uncertain. The effect of liver disease etiology on systemic treatment efficacy warrants further research. With an increased understanding of the pathophysiological pathways and accumulation of clinical data, personalized treatment decisions will be possible, and the field of systemic treatment for HCC will continue to evolve.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms
PubMed: 38766497
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.145493.2 -
Liver Cancer Apr 2024Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with...
BACKGROUND
Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking.
OBJECTIVES
This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC.
METHOD
A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.
PubMed: 38751554
DOI: 10.1159/000531744 -
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... May 2024Tissue derived tumor mutation burden (TMB) of ≥10 mutations/Mb is a histology agnostic biomarker for the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab. However, the...
PURPOSE
Tissue derived tumor mutation burden (TMB) of ≥10 mutations/Mb is a histology agnostic biomarker for the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab. However, the dataset on which this was validated lacked colorectal cancers (CRCs), and there is limited evidence for immunotherapy benefit in CRC using this threshold.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
CO.26 was a randomized phase II study of 180 patients comparing durvalumab and tremelimumab (D+T, n=119 patients) versus best supportive care (BSC, n=61 patients). ctDNA sequencing was available for 168 patients (n=118 D+T, n=50), of which 165 had evaluable plasma TMB (pTMB). Tissue sequencing was available for 108 patients. Optimal thresholds for stratifying patients based on overall survival were determined using a minimal p-value approach. This report includes the final overall survival analysis.
RESULTS
Tissue TMB ≥10 mutations/Mb was not predictive of benefit from D+T compared to BSC in microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic CRC (HR 0.71 [95% CI:0.28-1.80], p=0.47). No tissue TMB threshold could identify a high TMB group that benefited from ICI. In contrast, plasma TMB (pTMB) ≥28 mutations/Mb was predictive of benefit from D+T (HR=0.34 [95%CI:0.13-0.85], p=0.022), as was clonal pTMB ≥10.6 mutations/Mb (HR=0.10 [95%CI:0.014-0.79], p=0.029) and subclonal pTMB ≥25.9/Mb (HR=0.20 [95% CI:0.061-0.69], p=0.010). Higher pTMB was associated with length of time on cytotoxic agents (p=0.021) and prior anti-EGFR exposure (p=2.44x10-06).
CONCLUSION
pTMB derived from either clonal or subclonal mutations may identify a group more likely to benefit from immunotherapy, though validation is required. Tissue TMB provided no predictive utility for immunotherapy in this trial.
PubMed: 38727700
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-0268 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024The efficacy and safety of different immunosuppressants combined with chemotherapy in treating patients with small-cell lung cancer (extensive-disease small-cell lung... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of different immunosuppressants combined with chemotherapy in treating patients with small-cell lung cancer (extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer, limited-disease small-cell lung cancer and relapsed small-cell lung cancer) are still unknown, and there are no reports directly comparing the efficacy and safety of other immunotherapies.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of first-line immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer.
METHOD
We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases for relevant articles published from inception to November 11, 2020. The risk of bias of the included studies was conducted using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool. Multiple Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. They conducted data analysis using R Studio and STATA version 15.1. The outcomes comprised overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), stability of response (SOR), duration of response (DOR) and adverse events of grade 3 or higher (AE grade≥3). A 95% confidence interval (CI) was provided for each estimate.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 16 RCT studies with 5898 patients. For OS, relative to chemotherapy (MD=-4.49; 95%CI [-7.97, -1.03]), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (MD=-4.62; 95%CI [-9.08, -0.11]), ipilimumab (MD=-4.26; 95%CI [-8.01, -0.3]) and nivolumab(MD=-5.66; 95%CI [-10.44, -1.11]) and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (MD=-4.56; 95%CI [-8.7, -0.1]), serplulimab can significantly increase the OS of SCLC patients. There was no significant difference between PFS, SOR and DOR. Analysis of AE showed that different immunotherapy combined chemotherapy regimens were similar to single chemotherapy regarding the overall incidence of AE grade≥3. However, after the cumulative ranking of the common symptoms of different adverse reactions, it was found that nivolumab ranked first in the occurrence probability of anemia (99.08%), fatigue (84.78%), and decreased appetite (89.66%). durvalumab was the most likely in nausea (75.4%). Pembrolizumab (76.24%) was most likely to cause pruritus. Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy caused less diarrhea than chemotherapy alone (80.16%).
CONCLUSIONS
According to our analysis, serplulimab combined with chemotherapy is more likely to show better efficacy with a manageable safety profile for small-cell lung cancer. However, the evidence for this comparison shows some limitations due to the number of literature.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023486053.
Topics: Humans; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Immunotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
PubMed: 38694505
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1362537 -
Journal of Hematology & Oncology Apr 2024Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health concern worldwide, with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. In recent years, immunotherapies such as immune... (Review)
Review
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health concern worldwide, with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. In recent years, immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have made great progress in the systemic treatment of HCC. The combination treatments based on ICIs have been the major trend in this area. Recently, dual immune checkpoint blockade with durvalumab plus tremelimumab has also emerged as an effective treatment for advanced HCC. However, the majority of HCC patients obtain limited benefits. Understanding the immunological rationale and exploring novel ways to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy has drawn much attention. In this review, we summarize the latest progress in this area, the ongoing clinical trials of immune-based combination therapies, as well as novel immunotherapy strategies such as chimeric antigen receptor T cells, personalized neoantigen vaccines, oncolytic viruses, and bispecific antibodies.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Tumor Microenvironment; Immunotherapy; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Cancer Vaccines; Animals
PubMed: 38679698
DOI: 10.1186/s13045-024-01549-2 -
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology 2024Given the superior performance of various therapies over sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the absence of direct comparisons, it is crucial to...
BACKGROUND
Given the superior performance of various therapies over sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the absence of direct comparisons, it is crucial to explore the efficacy of these treatments in phase III randomized clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES
The goal is to identify which patients are most likely to benefit significantly from these emerging therapies, contributing to more personalized and informed clinical decision-making.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and international conference databases have been searched from 1 January 2010 to 1 December 2023.
RESULTS
After screening, 17 phase III trials encompassing 18 treatments were included. In the whole-population network meta-analysis, the newly first-line tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Tre + Du) was found to be comparable with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo + Beva) in providing the best overall survival (OS) benefit [hazard ratio (HR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-1.92]. Concerning OS benefits, sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar (Sint + Beva), camrelizumab plus rivoceranib (Camre + Rivo), and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (Lenva + Pemb) appear to exhibit similar effects to Tre + Du and Atezo + Beva. In the context of progression-free survival, Atezo + Beva seemed to outperform Tre + Du (HR: 0.66 CI: 0.49-0.87), while the effects are comparable to Sint + Beva, Camre + Rivo, and Lenva + Pemb. Upon comparison between Asia-Pacific and non-Asia-Pacific cohorts, as well as between hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected and non-HBV-infected populations, immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments seemed to exhibit heightened efficacy in the Asia-Pacific group and among individuals with HBV infection. However, combined ICI-based therapies did not show more effectiveness than molecular-targeted drugs in patients without macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread. As for grades 3-5 adverse events, combined therapies showed comparable safety to sorafenib and lenvatinib.
CONCLUSION
Compared with sorafenib and lenvatinib, combination therapies based on ICIs significantly improved the prognosis of advanced HCC and demonstrated similar safety. At the same time, the optimal treatment approach should be tailored to individual patient characteristics, such as etiology, tumor staging, and serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. With lower incidence rates of treatment-related adverse events and non-inferior efficacy compared to sorafenib, ICI monotherapies should be prioritized as a first-line treatment approach for patients who are not suitable candidates for ICI-combined therapies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42022288172.
PubMed: 38645513
DOI: 10.1177/17562848241237631